ON BEHALF OF MOTION INTERVENERS PLEADING SPENCER KUVIN ESQUIRE PGA Blvd Ste Palm Beach Gardens Florida June Palm Beach County Courthouse West Palm Beach Florida Beginning at oclock p.m SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER BE IT REMEMBERED that the following proceedings were had in the above-entitled cause before the HONORABLE JEFFREY COLBATH one of the judges of the aforesaid court at the Palm Beach County Courthouse located in the City of West Palm Beach State of Florida on June beginning at oclock p.m with appearances as hereinbefore noted to wit THEREUPON THE COURT Let me call up the case of the state of Florida versus Jeffrey Epstein Let me have counsel announce their appearances for the record MS SHULLMAN Deanna Shullman of Thomas Locicero Bralow on behalf of the Palm Beach Post THE COURT Ms Shullman nice to see you again good morning MS SHULLMAN You too MR GERBER William Berger for the intervener MR EDWARDS Brad Edwards also on behalf of the MR KUVIN Spencer Kuvin on behalf of motion interveners pleading SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER MR GOLDBERGER Good afternoon Judge Jack Goldberger and Robert Critton on behalf of Jeffrey Epstein THE COURT And Im guessing that Mr Kuvin if I grant the motion to unseal that which has been sealed your motion to intervene will be moot MR KUVIN Will be THE COURT I thought so This is what Im thinking and oh weve got more MS BURNS One more appearance excuse me Judge Barbara Burns on behalf of the state of Florida the state attorneys office of the 15th Judicial Circuit THE COURT All right Procedurally I think the way that this came to us is that at the conclusion or at some point during a plea conference between the state of Florida and Mr Epstein the state and the defense hand an agreed order to Judge Puccillo MS BURNS Puccillo THE COURT And asked her to sign an SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER agreement to seal some portion of some documents which she signed off on and now it is the interveners and the Posts motion to unseal those documents is that kind of procedurally where we are MR GOLDBERGER Procedurally not exactly correct I dont know if you want me to clarify that THE COURT Please do MR GOLDBERGER Your Honor this started during the course of a plea colloquy in Mr Epsteins state proceeding before Judge Puccillo who is a retired senior judge who was filling in for Judge Mcsorley on that day who was the judge assigned to this division It was a plea agreement with the state attorneys office and it is normal and consistent with any plea colloquy Judge Puccillo asked the defense whether there were any other promises or inducements for Mr Epstein to enter into his plea agreement other than what was contained in the state standard plea agreement that we had I felt obligated under the circumstances to alert SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER to the Court that there was a confidential agreement between Mr Epsteins Mr Epsteins attorneys and the United States attorneys office for the Southern District of Florida which would have been triggered upon the successful taking of the plea by Judge Puccillo In other words if the plea was accepted by Judge Puccillo theres a confidential agreement between U.S attorneys office and the defense that would be triggered and they would agree not to take some actions against Mr Epstein I advised Judge Puccillo of that and at that time she said she would like to see the matter sealed in the court file I said fine and then we later I then filed that document and the clerks office notified me and said we need an order sealing this and we submitted an order to seal the document THE COURT All right Is there anybody here from the U.S attorneys office Has anybody notified them or is there a dog in this fight or do they care SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER If theyre a party to this confidential thing wouldnt you think that they might be MR GOLDBERGER Your Honor they have been noticed They have taken a position in parallel proceedings that this matter should remain confidential and they have done that in federal court and I believe that is their position still MR EDWARDS Your Honor I have been in communication with the U.S attorneys office and they are not taking a position on this issue which is why theyre not in court right now THE COURT Whats going on in federal court MR GOLDBERGER There are a number of civil cases that are pending right now THE COURT And theyre talking about the same documents that are under seal here in our court MR EDWARDS Yes MR GOLDBERGER Yes your Honor and I will address that at the appropriate time whats going on here SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER THE COURT All right So thank you Mr Goldberger for getting that straightened out MR GERBER one other point Judge just to clarify THE COURT Sure MR GERBER I think actually theres an additional step because Mr Goldberger on behalf of Mr Epstein or Mr Critton I believe filed motion and I think that that will tell us who goes first today and who has the burden today THE COURT This is and Im thinking outloud that my take on that is that my review of the file shows that the appropriate steps to seal these documents wasnt followed initially Im looking at it as it would be whoevers moving to have them sealed its their burden to prove the steps that you have to prove to get things sealed by the Court and so thats I hinted last meeting that we all had together but thats where Id go so Id shift the burden over to the federal government and to Mr Epstein thats what SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER Im thinking Let me ask first go over to the Post Ms Shullman what are your thoughts on that procedure MS SHULLMAN Your Honor I think thats the correct procedure here I think Mr Epsteins motion to make court records confidential tacitly admits what we suspected last time which was that the initial closure of the documents was not done pursuant to the acceptable procedures THE COURT All right Mr Berger Mr Edwards thats all right with you MR EDWARDS We agree MR GERBER Thats what my point was yes your Honor thank you THE COURT you think Mr Goldberger what do MR GOLDBERGER Thats fine your Honor with the Ill wait until after the proceeding THE COURT All right You may proceed MR GOLDBERGER Judge as I said to clarify the record this matter started during the course of Mr Epsteins plea SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER colloquy in state court and just so that the record was clear that all inducements for Mr Epsteins plea was on the record when Judge Puccillo asked me if there had been any promises made to Mr Epstein I think properly and ethically we told the Court that there was an agreed confidential agreement with the federal government that was in place that basically said we will not prosecute Mr Epstein for federal offenses if the state plea agreement is accepted by the Court and Mr Epsteins sentence is imposed The state proceeding was over at the time that I advised Judge Puccillo that in other words we had gone through the plea colloquy and I simply was advising her of this other agreement It was Judge Puccillo who then asked us to approach and the Court has a copy of that transcript I believe It was Judge Puccillo that said Id like to have that document sealed in the court file and I acquiesced to that I said thats fine So first as a preliminary matter SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER it wasnt like we were coming into court on that day and asking to seal something so it would have been presumptuous of me to file something to request to have something sealed when it came up during the course of the proceeding and in fact the committee notes on the rule of judicial administration talk about that and say matters come up all the time during the course of hearings and the fact that something is not filed in advance does not necessarily taint the entire process so we agreed to come forward and file our motion to seal after the fact because we didnt know this matter would be coming up But having said that Judge this confidential agreement was not part of any state plea agreement its not part of the proceedings it was ancillary to the state proceedings and it had nothing to do with the state proceedings As an accommodation to Judge Puccillo we filed it in the court file Quite frankly its unnecessary it doesnt need to be there and the simplest approach would be to simply remove it from SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER the court file at this point We didnt have for it to be there Its not part of the plea its not part of the state resolution of the case and that would be the simple logical approach to that If the Court is inclined not do that or if the parties object to that then I think we move onto some other very very important issues in this case and for both the intervenors in this case as well as the Palm Beach Post motion for access to this proceeding for really two very very significant reasons they are in the wrong place and theyre attempting to march up the wrong hill here your Honor This matter needs to has to be litigated in federal court before Judge Marra who has already heard hearings on this matter Now at our last abbreviated hearing two weeks ago I told you for the first time that there have been two hearings in front of Judge Marra on this very issue whether this nonprosecution agreement and thats the matter that is sealed in your court file SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER whether this nonprosecution agreement should be released to the plaintiffs for their use Judge Marra heard two hearings on this matter and the court has those orders And in the first hearing Judge Marra very very carefully balanced the confidentiality issues of the nonprosecution agreement the intent of the parties as well of the rules of criminal procedure that I will talk about in a moment with the plaintiffs right to know whats going on and to have access to this agreement And Judge Marra crafted an order and in the nature of a protective order and said plaintiffs you can have this nonprosecution agreement you can use it you can review it you cannot give it to anyone else other than your clients and if you want to use it or you want to give it to your clients you need to tell them about this order that is not to be disclosed to anybody else And these plaintiffs that are sitting here will tell you that from day one they have had this SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER nonprosecution agreement they have it for their use they know every clause thats in that nonprosecution agreement and I suggest to the Court as to their motions why are we here they have an agreement already They went back to Judge Marra sometime thereafter and asked the Court to expand their use of the nonprosecution agreement and they said Judge Marra we have the nonprosecution agreement but we would like to be able to disclose that agreement to other sides and Judge Marra in another carefully crafted order said nuh-uh no you have not satisfied your burden you cannot disseminate this to anyone else and the order that I have entered remains in place but most significantly he said you know what this is without prejudice If you have some basis you have some need that you have not briefed you have not litigated with me yet concerning dissemination of nonprosecution agreement come back to me and Ill review it for you SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER And they have every right to do so and they have not done so and it is this motion to intervene that they filed in this court is simply an effort to skirt and to avoid and to go behind the order of Judge Marra that dealt with this issue already And I think just for the purpose of our hearing we need to have the two orders of Judge Marra entered into the record of this proceeding I know I gave copies to the Court but I have additional copies MR GOLDBERGER Your Honor I believe there is no objection from either of the parties THE COURT Thank you so much Lets go ahead and mark these as Defendants Exhibits No and for identification purposes Anybody object to me taking judicial notice of Judge Marras order By hearing no objection Ill go ahead and take judicial notice of it MR GOLDBERGER So your Honor Judge Marra has dealt with this issue squarely theres a procedure in place and SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER these matters should be litigated in front of the district court judge that has already heard these matters THE COURT Well lets say that may be true as it relates to these individual plaintiffs in the federal litigation what about the Posts and the pres the medias right to take a look at these things MR GOLDBERGER Your Honor and this is the second reason why not only the plaintiffs but the Post appear to be marching up the wrong hill here The Palm Beach Post has filed a motion for access to these documents and they certainly do have first amendment rights and no one would dispute that they have first amendment rights to access to public records however most significantly in this case is that the nonprosecution agreement which we gave the court permission to review two weeks ago and presumably the Court has had an opportunity to take a look at it the nonprosecution agreement talks about and relates to a grand jury matter that is SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER absolutely percent protected from disclosure by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure Six for the Court THE COURT that please I have a copy of that rule Let me take a look of MR GOLDBERGER Give us one moment your Honor we have it here somewhere MR KUVIN Your Honor just briefly while theyre looking on behalf of the plaintiff I just wanted to point out on my client motion to intervene we are not party to the federal action She only has a state court claim Shes not bound by any federal court order she is not with the federal court on their claim so as to that issue my client stands here synonymous with the Post THE COURT that out to me Thank you for pointing MR GOLDBERGER Well have it for you in one moment your Honor Your Honor Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure Six is a rule that deals with grand jury proceedings and it confers in SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER the federal system secrecy of all grand jury matters and its pretty clear in this case that the nonprosecution agreement specifically talks about a grand jury investigation of Mr Epstein theres specific reference to a grand jury investigation in the nonprosecution agreement The rule does not prevent us from telling the Court that there was a grand jury investigation of Mr Epstein but what it prevents us from doing what it prevents this Court from doing I believe is disclosing the content of the grand jury investigation and the agreement itself is very specific as to the grand jury investigation of Mr Epstein However all is not lost for the Palm Beach Post and the intervenors for that matter The rule has a specific procedure that allows you to go to the district court where the grand jury is convened in this case it would be in the Southern District of Florida before Judge Marra and that is under Rule 6E your Honor I think its 6E SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER 3E actually It says In limited circumstances the Court may authorize disclosure of grand jury matters under request made in connection with the judicial proceeding so and the rule goes onto clearly say that request must be filed in the district where the grand jury is proceeding So the first you know the Palm Beach Post may have first amendment rights to access but those first amendment rights cannot circumvent the federally protected secrecy of grand jury proceedings and thats what the Post is doing by making this request before this Court This matter has been sealed for almost a year now months and some days and the Palm Beach Post has not filed anything in this matter until most recently and their remedy is to go into the federal court and invoke the process of Rule Six and asked Judge Marra to make a limited disclosure of the nonprosecution agreement and the grand jury matters that are contained therein Who knows whether SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER he will do it but thats where this battle need to be fought As a matter of comity your Honor this Court should defer to Judge Marra because A he has already ruled on the disclosure of the nonpros agreement but even more importantly the supremacy clause requires you to defer to the federal laws of criminal procedure that say these matters should be protected and should not be disclosed unless the district court says so If the Court is going to go on and wants to go to the issues that would be contained if it were not dealing with a grand jury proceeding obviously theres a test that the Court must then use under the Rules of Judicial Administration and it says matters can be sealed but they should be sealed if theres a compelling government interest or if the sealing is important to the administration of justice Theres a couple other criteria but the ones obviously that would apply in this case are the compelling government SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER interest and the importance to the administration of justice Again we are dealing with a secret grand jury matter We cannot circumvent that secrecy by asking the Court to invoke its unsealing power THE COURT Thank you MR GOLDBERGER Thank you your Honor THE COURT Let me go over to the other parties and well get back to Mr Goldberger and his client wants to go first Post who MS SHULLMAN Mr Edwards THE COURT Mr Edwards MR EDWARDS Your Honor inasmuch as Mr Epstein is relying on Judge Marras order to support the argument that the nonprosecution agreement needs to remain sealed Id like to address that if you are inclined to be persuaded by that argument at all The orders that have now been moved into evidence are in case No and just to put that order in context in SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER actuality the order says specifically puts it back on this Court and confers authority on this Court over this particular document when in the second page of the February 12th order its misdated but its a order and the last two sentences read If and when petitioners have a specific tangible need to be relieved of the restrictions they should file an appropriate motion which we believe we have done in this case if a specific tangle need arises in the civil cases which are in circuit court in Palm Beach County then relief should be sought there and notice to all parties so to give the Court context for that order there was a state court plea taken June 30th where Mr Epstein pled guilty to the state court cases as it related to two victims Now parallel to that there was an investigation in federal court where the United States attorneys office and the FBI had more than victims of sex abuse of Mr Epsteins and they were working with these girls and their cases Now several SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER of those girls came to me and said hey were worried that theres a secret deal going on between Epstein and the U.S attorneys office so I filed an emergency petition against the U.S attorneys office asking the federal court to intervene and get in the middle of this and not let this deal go forward without meaningfully conferring with these girls because I was alleging it violated the Crimes Victims Rights Act these girls have a right to be heard That emergency motion was filed July 7th and I have that for the Court and Id like to enter that into evidence as well THE COURT Well mark that as Exhibit No MR EDWARDS And an emergency hearing was held four days later in front of Judge Marra who was randomly assigned to this case at the time the plea was taken and the prosecution agreement was sealed Judge Marra had nothing to do with the agreement with Epstein he didnt know anything about it SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER So four days later now were in front of him and the United States attorneys office says for the first time sorry girls you are too late the deal has already been done as to all of your federal cases and it resulted in the nonprosecution agreement that is attached in the state court case Judge Marra turned to us and said what is your remedy At that point in time I said we dont know because we dont know what protections are inside that agreement so we want you to unseal it thats where the motion for protective order came about where he gave us the agreement so we can look at it and determine what remedy if any was available Once we had that agreement under the caveat that we were not able to disseminate to third parties and reviewed it and saw there is very little protection for the girls we asked to unseal it completely so that we can talk to third parties to victims rights groups and get some insight as to what our possible remedy would be SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER And so our reason for wanting him to unseal it at that time was we want to be able to talk to other people and thats where this order from February 12th came in and he denied that motion to unseal it for three reasons First and foremost this nonprosecution agreement was not sealed in my Court you are talking to the wrong judge you need to go back so were getting the back and forth here and its not in my court I cant mess with some other judges order Obviously there was a hearing held and that document was sealed for a reason Im not privy for those reasons so Im not going to override whatever that judge was thinking when they sealed that document Second your reason is you just want to talk to other people about them and if Im going to override some other judges order I need to have a more compelling reason than you just want to talk to people about Third if and when a specific need SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER arises in any of the civil cases which by the time this order was coming about they were stacking up in state and federal court against Mr Epstein petition that court petition the appropriate court and he implies that appropriate court is this court where it was initially sealed which weve done in this case This court has none of the problems that Judge Marra had in that it was sealed in this courtroom We have noticed Mr Epstein to be heard at this hearing which is one of the requirements that Judge Marra placed on us and a specific need has arisen It has been sealed for over a year now correct Mr Goldberger is correct but the specific need is arising because we are in the middle of discovery And this document is as Mr Goldberger said a great inducement to Mr Epstein pleaing guilty to sex crimes in state court and to ultimately being labeled a sex offender and the only document that pertains to my clients my client as a victim of Mr Epsteins sex crime so at SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER the very least we should be allowed to ask people in deposition and do discovery about how this document came about need here There is a THE COURT I dont quite get I dont think its relevant to what my task is here but I dont get how its relevant in the civil cases what the federal government did or didnt do with regard to prosecuting Mr Epstein I dont get that but I dont know that I need to MR EDWARDS The standard for discovery is just reasonably calculated to lead to discovery of admissible evidence and without going in depth we do have intention MR GERBER Your Honor can I MR EDWARDS And with respect to the grand jury argument youve seen the document its only page five and six that its even referred to THE COURT All right Let me turn it over to does the Post want to speak MS SHULLMAN I do but I think he wants to go first so whenever SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER THE COURT I havent considered your motion to intervene yet MR KUVIN I dont believe it was an objection When it was filed there was no objection by Mr Goldberger or Mr Critton THE COURT Are you going to advocate by motion to intervene or are you going to be jumping into the merits of the sealing MR KUVIN Ill jump right into the merits Im not going to duplicate anything that was just raised or anything that the press is going to raise I have an individual interest THE COURT All right Go ahead Mr Kuvin MR KUVIN Very briefly your Honor I represent who has filed only a state court action she is not under the federal jurisdiction of Judge Marra she does not subject herself to the federal jurisdiction of Judge Marra she was never provided an opportunity to brief any issues before Judge Marra with respect to that order that was entered by Judge Marra or either order In addition whats also very important is SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER she has never seen this document so she does not know what is in the contents of the order so the issue is raised by Mr Goldberger about the girls are able to see the document and evaluate how they might need to evaluate this document does not apply to my client because she has never seen it and frankly without subjecting herself voluntarily to the jurisdiction of Judge Marra which she chooses not to do then she cannot get this document otherwise she would have to go to federal court submit herself to the jurisdiction of the federal court to then see a state court document which does not make any sense because if it is a state court document in state court as previously stated under Judge Marras order it is within your purview and your jurisdiction to rule on a state court document Finally with respect to why the document may be relevant the contents of that document speak to the issues of whether or not Mr Epstein can or cannot SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER assert his fifth amendment right against self incrimination and we believe on a good faith believe that on the contents of that document speak to the issues of whether or not he can or cannot deny the claims that have been brought against him both in state and federal court In other words whether or not he must in fact admit that he molested these year old girls so therefore the content of that document is paramount as to the issues in the civil proceedings that are currently pending in state court which is why we would like that document THE COURT you so very much Post Okay Thank you Thank Ms Shullman from the MS SHULLMAN Thank you your Honor I feel a little bit like I have stepped into the twilight zone here so Id like to address a couple of the things weve addressed and get us to what we are really here to do today THE COURT I dont know if you are referring specifically to the courtroom or SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER the convoluted situation that brings us to the courtroom MS SHULLMAN Just this whole federal state situation There is no hill for the public and the press to march up in Judge Marras court as Mr Edwards pointed out Judge Marra has specifically held the agreement was not filed in this case under seal or otherwise so were I to march into Judge Marras courtroom and do my whole public access spiel he would say take it to you your Honor because its not a record in my court It is a record here and in the state court as we talked about the last time we were here theres a presumption of openness The burden is on Mr Epstein to overcome that presumption While he filed a very brief memorandum after our last hearing which identified for interest he has by no means met the test of either establishing those interest or establishing the remainder of that test which would be that closures no broader than necessary ineffective no other reasonable alternatives so if I could Id SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER like to sort of focus us back to the inquiry were here to make today in this court and that is whether your Honor is going to provide public access to two records that are I think indisputably in your Honors court file in this courts file Its a plea agreement and an addendum those are historically and typically open records Mr Goldberger mentioned that the plea agreement was sort of incidentally filed in this court file and that it was sort of an afterthought that happened He never came into court intending that it even be part of the court file but Judge Pucillo specifically said this is a significant inducement to accepting the plea in my court This agreement that you have with federal prosecutors is significantly the reason why youre entering this plea before me And she took those records into the court file presumably because they are significant to this litigation Even if there was an SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER incidental filing which cannot possibly be the case here there is no mechanism in Florida law to call a Mulligan and to pull it out of the court file As you know the Floridians have a constitutional right of access theres no mechanism in that law to just say oopsy lets take it out of the file so they have to meet their burden and they have to show under Rule that one of those interests is satisfied They have identified four here I have not heard them discuss them at any great length But I will go through them quickly The imminent threat to the fair impartial orderly administration of justice or to protect a compelling government interest As your Honor is aware the federal government is not here today I have spoken with the state attorneys office who has indicated that their only interest is in protecting to the extent necessary because Ive not seen these documents the identity of the victims of these crimes The Post in its motion to intervene SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER has already set forth that we have no objection to redacting the victims names if in fact that is required because we havent seen the agreement To avoid substantial injury to innocent third parties again absolutely no showing on that test I have no burden at this point but I will simply state that the law in Florida is clear that Mr Epstein doesnt have standing to assert that interest And finally something else I heard nothing about to avoid substantial injury to a party which I guess presumably would be Mr Epstein by disclosure of matters protected by a privacy right not generally inherent in this specific type of proceedings Again I have not heard any attempt to meet the burden on that issue however Florida law is equally clear that participants in crimes lose their privacy interest in the matters and facts and circumstances of the commission of those crimes so Mr Epstein surely cannot establish that there is a separate privacy interest not inherent in a criminal SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER prosecution regarding the molestation of young girls The circumstances under which closure is allowed in Florida are exceedingly narrow We first and before we do anything else have to find that one of those interests is met here that it exists and that the movant has met its burden in demonstrating that its significant enough to require the court to consider closure Thats not the end of inquiry And of course I have not yet heard anything else about that second half of the test which talks about the idea that closure is no broader than necessary to protect that interest and that it would be effective and that there are no other alternatives In speaking of the federal litigation there are instances when both Mr Epsteins lawyers and the federal prosecutors have placed portions of the agreement into the public court file There are thus attempts to seal those records in the federal litigation have been unsuccessful so part of this agreement the cat is SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER already out of the bag But there is also an enormous public interest in whats going on here apart from the idea that this man is accused of having many many victims who were all young children which of course in itself creates a lot of public concern the chief of police at the time sent a letter to the state prosecutors and said what are you guys doing how are you handling this this is highly unusual I dont like what Im seeing here And even went so far as to say state attorneys office should you all step away from this case So we have public interest from the perspective of the police chief questioning the state attorneys office about whether its doing its job We have public interest thats spurned by the idea that some of the victims in the federal prosecution in the federal court claimed they werent aware of it we just heard Mr Edwards talk about the fact that his clients werent aware of the agreement unless it all went down so we have a SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER significant public interest about how everybody in this litigation is doing their job There is nothing more fundamentally important than the ability of the public and the press to observe how its government all branches of its government do its job There are multiple as Mr Edwards also mentioned multiple civil lawsuits that have spurned as a result of Mr Epsteins conduct and again the public has an interest in whats going on in civil litigation matters In short this matter involves a major public interest from a lot of different levels There is no basis for closure that has been asserted here Its a heavy burden to meet We start with the idea that openness is the right thing to do but there is essentially no purpose served at this point by keeping these agreements sealed in this case Unless your Honor has any questions I think thats it THE COURT Okay Thank you so very SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER much Ms Burns on behalf of the state of Florida anything youd like to add or advocate MS BURNS If I may your Honor THE COURT Sure MS BURNS Good afternoon your Honor THE COURT Good afternoon MS BURNS Your Honor the State is not here to take a position on whether or not this court should seal continue to seal the records or unseal the records are here merely to uphold the state laws which require all of us as members of the judicial system to protect the rights of the confidentiality of the victims see two issues here your Honor I do One is if you decide to unseal the We records based upon the arguments that have been presented to you then the State would ask that the court first do an incamera viewing not just merely open up that portion of the file for viewing by all interested parties first that the Court do an incamera viewing to make two SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER evaluations Number one does the document in fact have a relationship to the criminal case in the state matter And number two evaluate the right of public access versus the victims right to confidentiality If this Court does decide to unseal those records then the State would ask that this Court before making the document public access then make certain that in place is that the victims identities are amended to initials if their names are used The State does have a concern regarding the argument of the Federal Rule Six in that is this Court bound by a federal rule which perhaps has been made unenforcible by virtue of making it a part of the state file so I think the Court also would need to address that issue before making its ruling THE COURT All right great Thank you so much MS BURNS Thank you Judge THE COURT One last chance for the federal government theyre not here and SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER Ill let rebuttal of any other presentation Mr Goldberger or Mr Critton youd like to make MR GOLDBERGER Thank you your Honor As to the last argument made by Ms Burns as to the applicability of Federal Rule of the Rules of Federal Criminal Procedure its something that we learned in the law school that the supremacy clause controls and to the extent theres a conflict between the federal doctrine and the state doctrine the supremacy clause requires the federal rule of law to apply and to control And certainly in this case you cannot use a state procedure to circumvent a federal rule of criminal procedure that confers secrecy to a grand jury proceeding And the Palm Beach Post response to the argument never made note of the grand jury rule they simply avoided that issue and that in our mind is equally important as the fact in the interest of comity this Court should defer to the rulings of Judge Marra already SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER As to Mr Kuvins argument that he has a client that is in state court and is not in federal court and therefore he doesnt have a remedy in federal court With all due respect to Mr Kuvin thats similarly wrong Judge Marras order specifically dealt with a class of individuals who were identified as victims of Mr Epsteins conduct and Judge Marras order says that anyone whos been identified by the United States attorneys office as a victim has right to the nonprosecution agreement under the same rules Just so the Court understands I know we are talking like the Court understands everything about this case There was a list of victims that was created at the time that the nonprosecution agreement was entered into and Mr Kuvins client is on that list That list was created by the U.S attorneys office He has the same rights to the nonprosecution agreement as if he filed this case in federal court and he knows that weve told him that he has SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER that access As to the fact that the nonprosecution agreement is presumably not filed in the federal case in our last hearing in front of Judge Marra on June 5th Im sorry June 12th Mr Edwards advised Judge Marra that he had in fact filed a nonprosecution agreement to no ones surprise under seal in the federal file so the nonprosecution agreement according to Mr Edwards declaration at that hearing is contained in the federal court system For all of those reasons your Honor and the reasons that I previously indicated to the Court we would ask the Court to defer to the federal court in this matter THE COURT Okay Thank you very much Here is what Im planning on doing so you know where Im going on this Ill make an oral announcement and Ill follow it up with a written order so that you all can have something to take to wherever you want to take it I find that the appropriate procedure SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER to seal or close these documents has not been met so Ill deny the motion to seal the documents Ill grant the motion to unseal them I will take a look at the documents I will redact out of them the what Ill do is Ill leave the originals intact sealed in the court file to protect the names of any underage victims I will make copies of those Ill redact out the names leaving expose the initials of any of the individuals Ill get that done Ill get my written order out granting and denying the respective motions hopefully by the end of today If not today tomorrow I plan on releasing the redacted versions probably Monday so that those will be available for public consumption on Monday MR GOLDBERGER Your Honor thank you Thank you for the oral pronouncement Your Honor based on the Courts ruling we do have a motion to stay disclosure of the nonprosecution agreement The rules of appellate procedure require us to file that SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER before your Honor Your Honor we do intend to take certiorari on this to the Fourth District Court THE COURT Thats why I figure between the written rule and the disclosure give you a chance to catch your breath and do that I guess you might want that Monday p.m enough time for you to get over to the DCA MR GOLDBERGER Actually your Honor the Rule of Appellate Procedure maintains jurisdiction with you on this matter to entertain the motion to stay Is THE COURT So I need to handle the motion to stay MR GOLDBERGER Correct your Honor THE COURT Do you want to argue that now Do you want to take a look at that catch your breath come back and see me Monday sometime whats your pleasure MR GOLDBERGER Were ready to do it now your Honor THE COURT your thoughts Were ready to do it now All right Interveners SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER MR KUVIN Matter of procedure point I just want to make sure that the motion to intervene is in fact granted THE COURT You re motion to intervene is granted Do you have a written order for me to sign off on there MR KUVIN I can submit that THE COURT Why dont you catch your breath and come back tomorrow and Ill hear argument It will give me a chance to read the motion check out the rules take a look got to get myself gassed up Anybody want to drop anything off for me to read before the hearing please do that Why dont we do that tomorrow morning and why dont we reconvene here tomorrow at on the motion to stay MR GOLDBERGER Thats fine THE COURT How does your schedule look MR GERBER Your Honor is it possible to have it a little later perhaps an hour later tomorrow THE COURT MR GERBER If possible SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER THE COURT How about a little later than that still let me take a look at our official calendaring system here MR CRITTON Judge Colbath Im gone tomorrow Im going to Gainesville at one or home at one I told my wife I would be My daughters birthday shes having a party I plan to be there Can we do it tomorrow morning any time it would be great THE COURT Tomorrow morning is ugly This isnt going to take long MS BURNS This is a five-minute motion THE COURT Why dont we do this meet at MS SHULLMAN Your Honor Im not going to be able to get my kids to school if I have to be here at is in California right now My husband MR GOLDBERGER I dont mean to jump in I wonder if we can do some of this telephonically MS SHULLMAN Yes I can appear by phone or I can have one of my partners SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER THE COURT In the morning what would be a good start time for you MS SHULLMAN Nine would be getter I cant drop them off before eight THE COURT Its going to be brief argument lets do it tomorrow morning work for you MR CRITTON Yes sir Thank you MR GOLDBERGER Just very briefly the Court is going to look at the nonprosecution agreement and do some redacting I believe I just need to advise the court in addition to Mr Epstein and perhaps victims mention the nonprosecution agreement there are third parties who the Court needs to look about redacting their names also and thats contained in the nonprosecution agreement In other words there are other people beside Mr Epstein and Mr Victims whose names are mentioned in the nonprosecution agreement and I would ask the Court to look at those names also for the purpose of redacting THE COURT Ill like a look SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER MR EDWARDS Your Honor those are not names of victims those are co-conspirators as listed in the agreement and we would object to any redaction of those names I dont think theres any standing to ask for that THE COURT Ill take a look All right See you all tomorrow morning at nine If you want to send anything to me later this afternoon or tomorrow morning before we take the bench Im happy to receive it Have a good afternoon Proceedings concluded SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER I I A THE STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF PALM BEACH I SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R Official Court Reporter for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit Criminal Division in and for Palm Beach County Florida do hereby certify that I was authorized to and did report the foregoing proceedings before the Court at the time and place aforesaid and that the preceding pages numbered from to inclusive represent a true and accurate transcription of my steno notes taken at said proceedings IN WITNESS WHEREOF I have hereunto affixed my official signature this 29th day of June a-w vWJ SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R SUSAN WIGGINS R.P.R AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
44,020 characters
